Like it or Not – Abortion is an Issue in the 2014 Elections

We like it – they don’t. They – our opponents and many of their media supporters – would rather talk about a “war on women.”

That’s why, as sure as April showers, every federal election cycle we are told that the abortion issue “doesn’t matter.” The electorate is preoccupied with (fill in the blank).

Does it remind you of the adage that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it? Abortion, once again, is being written off as inconsequential. In fact, it will very much matter in the 2014 off-year elections.

Remember back in early 2014 when the contest for an open Florida seat between pro-life Republican David Jolly and pro-abortion Democrat Alex Sink was advertised as a “bellwether” election, a foreshadowing of what could happen this November?

While many political pundits argued that the abortion issue would play a diminished role in 2014, the stark differences on life issues between Jolly and Sink were highlighted on the campaign trail. And, their contrasting positions on Obamacare – in a district carried by Obama in 2008 and 2012 – were at the very center of the campaign.

As is so often the case, we defeated Sink, a candidate endorsed by the radically pro-abortion, loaded-with-money EMILY’s List. Despite Sink’s far greater name-recognition, Jolly won with 48.5% to Sink’s 46.7%. As is National Right to Life’s style, we worked quietly to educate, energize, and illuminate the vast differences between Mr. Jolly and Ms. Sink on life issues.

But everything we do is a partnership. That is where you, working with National Right to Life, play such an instrumental role.

National Right to Life created the National Right to Life Political Action Committee in 1979, and it is the most effective single-issue pro-life political action committee in the country. We have been involved in every federal election since Ronald Reagan’s victory over Jimmy Carter in 1980, and we have a proven record of success.

In 2012, a new independent expenditure political committee, the National Right to Life Victory Fund, was created to expand and enhance our political impact. The combined power and experience of National Right to Life’s political committees, and its network of dedicated volunteers, help make the difference in close elections, and very often provide the margin of victory for pro-life candidates. Consider the track record.

In 2012, 80% of the 290 federal candidates endorsed by National Right to Life won their elections.
Of those 290 candidates, we focused on 111 of the most competitive federal races. Despite being vastly outspent by pro-abortion groups, 62% of the 111 candidates supported by National Right to Life won.

Over the last four election cycles (2006-2012), EMILY’s List raised and spent more than $178 million – a 12-1 pro-abortion advantage in funding.

Despite that, in those four election cycles, National Right to Life-supported candidates won 48 of 74 head-to-head races against EMILY’s List candidates – 65%!

Allow me to close on a more personal note.

Often, you’ll see the scripture from Deuteronomy 30 on our PAC literature: “I have set before you life and death…choose life then, that you and your descendants may live.”

I’m from Morgantown, West Virginia. I am a direct descendant of Colonel Zackquill Morgan, Morgantown’s founder, who was my great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather. In order for me, my children, and my grandson to exist, the Colonel, his children, and his children’s children had to choose life.

In West Virginia, we know that our greatest resource is not our mountains, not our coal, but our children.

Long ago, pro-lifers warned that once we devalue the lives of our own unborn children, the slippery slope will lead us to devalue those in other facets of life – those who are sick, or those who are vulnerable at the end of their lives. Sadly, our country has rapidly moved into this culture of death.
It is difficult to exaggerate how imperative it is that we work to nominate and elect pro-life candidates, who can win in November, in order to protect the most vulnerable members of the human family – unborn children and medically disabled or dependent persons, whose lives are threatened by abortion or euthanasia.

The most important reason pro-life candidates benefit is because the American people are pro-life – you are pro-life. Thank you!

Choose life then, that you and your descendants may live.

By Karen Cross, National Right to Life Political Director

Editor’s note. This appeared on page one of the August edition of National Right to Life News. You can read the issue in its entirety at www.nrlc.org/uploads/NRLNews/NRLNewsAugust2014.pdf.

U.S. Supreme Court Must Resolve Clash Over Illinois Choose Life License Plates

Thomas More Society files amicus brief urging Justices to uphold free speech

On August 13th, the Thomas More Society filed an amicus brief urging the United States Supreme Court to hear a case involving "Choose Life" license plates, in order to resolve disputes among lower courts over how to treat specialty license plates. The brief is brought on behalf of Choose Life America, Choose Life Wisconsin, and Illinois Choose Life, and urges the Justices to hear the case and uphold broad free speech rights for license plates.

"Every American should have the opportunity to purchase a 'Choose Life' license plate," said Peter Breen, Thomas More Society vice president and senior counsel. "While most states allow a broad range of messages on specialty license plates, the ACLU and its allies have diminished free speech by preventing Americans from obtaining 'Choose Life' plates in many states. Because some lower courts have agreed with the ACLU and silenced free speech, we urge the Supreme Court to reaffirm the broad free speech rights of citizens to have the message of their choice on their license plates."

"Choose Life" license plates are available in 29 states and the District of Columbia, and the revenue they generate benefits adoption-related organizations, including pregnancy care centers that serve mothers in need. North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Illinois are among the states where "Choose Life" plates are not available, either due to inaction by the legislature or court action to suppress the plates.

"It makes no sense that the 'Choose Life' specialty plate is upheld by some courts and condemned by others," added Steve Crampton, Thomas More Society special counsel. "Thousands of drivers wish to purchase 'Choose Life' specialty plates in order to express their personal views in favor of an important societal issue, but they are not able to do so because of confusing contradictions in the lower courts. It's high time that this conflict is resolved once and for all--the forum of specialty plates should include all speech."

Read Thomas More Society's amicus brief here.

 

Contact: Tom Ciesielka

Source: Thomas More Society

Robin Williams: Abortion of His Unborn Child May Have Added to Struggle With Depression

Actor and comedian Robin Williams died August 11^th from a suspected suicide.  Fans from around the world are grieving the tragic loss of this talented actor and comedian.  Such an act of desperation reveals Williams was clearly in great emotional pain.   A headline on NBC News Online shares that Robin Williams Battled Demons for Decades Before His Death.

Many are aware that Williams struggled for years with serious addiction issues. However a lesser known fact is that one of those demons was an abortion that took place in the 1970’s.

From Robin Williams: A Biography by Andy Dougan

… His early days back in San Francisco after dropping out of Julliard (in the mid 1970’s) were among the unhappiest of his life. His relationship with his girlfriend, which had seemed so full of promise back in New York, had now come to a sudden and abrupt end…In an interview in Playboy magazine some years later, the subject turned to the Bush administration’s stance on abortion….Williams offered that making the decision to have an abortion was not an easy one, which begged the obvious question from interviewer Lawrence Grobel about whether he had ever found himself in that position.

 ‘Long, long, long time ago,’ Williams replied candidly, ‘and it was because we were too young and it wasn’t right.’  (Pg 35)

Is there a relationship between Robin William’s descent into drug addiction and depression that began in the 1970’s and his past abortion?

The Death of Young Love

Williams appears to have been very close to the mother of his aborted child and as the excerpt from his biography reveals, the period after the abortion and the end of the relationship were days of deep and painful darkness.  Even as he began to enjoy considerable professional success as an actor/comedian, he struggled with addiction.

Consider the emotional vulnerability of a young man and woman in their mid 20’s as Williams tried to make his way in the highly competitive world of entertainment in the 1970’s.  Think about how powerful a loving, caring and understanding relationship is in helping you negotiate the stress and challenges of such times.  When the relationship is sexual, you have the deeply intimate experience of sharing your body, heart and soul with another person.

This union of pleasure, joy and love between Williams and his partner results in a pregnancy as a new life has been conceived in this act of love-making.  When they decide to “end the pregnancy” by abortion, a very complex set of emotions are unleashed upon the young couple.

There were likely some rather pressured but reasoned discussions between the couple of why abortion was the only rational choice…as Williams shared:

…we were too young and it wasn’t right.’  

Few relationships survive the complex emotional pain and complicated grief that naturally follows the decision to abort one’s unborn child.  The powerful memories and emotions from such an experience defy our desperate rationalizations, and remain long after the relationship ends.  To think otherwise is a failure to respect the power, depth and complexity of human intimate relationships.

Uncomfortably Numb

The most common self-medication for these intimate and painful feelings and memories…sex, drugs and alcohol.  The 1970’s and early 1980’s were fertile soil for such acting-out with the widespread use of cocaine in music and entertainment circles.

In a Guardian interview in 2008, Williams shares about his behavior during his periods of addiction:

“You know, I was shameful…You do stuff that causes disgust, and that’s hard to recover from. You can say, ‘I forgive you’ and all that stuff, but it’s not the same as recovering from it.”

 Drawing upon the experience of hundreds of men’s testimonies about their abortion loss, Williams may have been making a thinly veiled reference to what society tells us does not exist…his post abortion trauma and complicated grief.

Let’s re-visit his quote above, but this time in the context of abortion loss:

You know that abortion was so deeply painful, and shameful…I am disgusted by my actions that led to the destruction of my unborn child, and struggle as a man and father.  That abortion procedure was the death of my partnership with the child’s mother and  it deeply wounded my heart and soul.  No drug can remove that pain.   I want to forgive myself and others…but I need to find a way to recover from this loss.

Author M. Alex Johnson on NBC News Online shares:

He never seemed to have full control of his fame…Williams talked of having become addicted to cocaine while he was appearing on “Mork & Mindy” (1978-1982.)…Cocaine, Williams told People magazine in 1988, “was a place to hide. Most people get hyper on coke. It slowed me down.”

Some will be quick to dismiss the relationship of his abortion in the 1970’s to his subsequent abuse and addictions to cocaine and alcohol, but look at Williams own words.  He was looking for a place to “hide”…hide from what?    There may have been other contributing factors in his vulnerability to addiction, such as his rise to stardom and the stress and temptations of the world of entertainment.  But given what we have learned after 20 years of research and recovery work with those who have experienced abortion lossaddictions are a common way that woman and men cope with the painful feelings and memories they bury after abortion.

 In 1982, Williams was doing coke with John Belushi the night Belushi died of an overdose.   Keep in mind that his association with Belushi the night of his death would naturally trigger his repressed post abortion pain and guilt connected to his role in the death of his unborn child.  He may not have made the conscious connection, but those emotions would help add gasoline to his already raging addiction issues.

Displacement of a Father’s Grief

Williams would later become a vocal advocate for abortion rights.  This reveals another common strategy of those that are unable to reconcile and recover from their abortion loss.  The energy that would be better directed toward healing this loss is instead focused on the need to promote abortion accessibility for the poor and protecting woman’s health.  This activism on behalf of abortion rights serves to deflect his conflicted emotions and complicated grief around his personal abortion, as it is displaced onto anti abortion activists and their political allies.

However the symptoms often tell the story and if you follow the trail, they will take you back to what was a life-changing event for Robin Williams and his partner in the 1970’s…the abortion of their unborn child.

Years of using drugs and alcohol to cope with abortion loss and other emotional pain and life stress takes a toll on the emotions and nervous system of addicts. The failure to recognize the role of abortion loss can be a significant factor in one’s addictive behavior and shuts the door on reconciliation and recovery from the abortion wound.

There is Hope and Healing

There is a way to recover from this loss.  If you are a man or woman who was part of an abortion decision(s) in the past, there is hope and healing available to you.  The abortion loss may be part of a larger tapestry of challenges that you have faced in your life journey.  But that abortion loss can be significant contributing and often causative factor in the anxiety, depression, addictions and other symptoms that you may struggle with.   Attending an abortion recovery program can help you learn to find healthy ways of grieving those areas of pain and loss that lead to reconciliation, resurrection and new life…not self destruction and death.

Source: LifeNews.com Note: Kevin Burke, LSW, is the co founder of Rachel’s Vineyard Ministries and a Pastoral Associate of Priests for Life. This originally appeared at the Priests for Life blog.

September 13 marks National Day of Remembrance for Aborted Children at gravesites

The National Day of Remembrance for Aborted Children on Saturday, September 13, 2014, was first marked in the modern era last fall, but memorialization of society's tiniest innocent victims is not a new idea.Citizens for a Pro-life Society, Priests for Life, and the Pro-life Action League have reached back to ancient Rome for the inspiration behind this solemn national event. Dug into the walls of the earliest Christian catacombs in the outskirts of Rome are countless small tombs, only a foot or two across. These are the burial places of infants cast out of their pagan homes and left to die of starvation and exposure - a common practice of that time. Members of the early church, charged by Christ to love all their neighbors, offered these newborn sacrifices to Roman cruelty the only act of love they could - that of burying their little bodies and mourning for them in prayer.

This tradition of mercifully burying abandoned children continues in our own day with the National Day of Remembrance for Aborted Children, taking place on September 13. Mourners across the country will visit the grave sites of aborted children, whose broken bodies were recovered from trash dumpsters and pathology labs and solemnly buried over the four decades of legal abortion in the United States.

Under the director of three national pro-life groups - Citizens for a Pro-life Society, Priests for Life, and the Pro-life Action League - simultaneous memorial services will be held at more than forty such grave sites, as well as at scores of other memorial markers set up in memory of the aborted unborn at churches and cemeteries.

Eric Scheidler, Executive Director of the Pro-life Action League, stated, "It's sobering to realize that grave markers for the unborn victims of abortion list only a date of burial. They have no birthdays because they were never allowed to be born. We can list no date of death, because those who killed them discarded their bodies like garbage. But they are not garbage to us. They are our brothers and sisters. That's why we buried them, and that's why we visit their graves to mourn for them and testify to their humanity."

Monica Miller, Director of Citizens for a Pro-life Society, added, "Since 1973, 55 million innocent unborn children have been killed with the sanction of law. A fraction of these victims of the American slaughter have actually been buried. The graves of these victims are scattered across America - graves of sorrow and graves of indictment on a nation that permitted the killing of the innocent. As we visit these graves on September 13, we call upon our nation to remember these victims and bring an end to the injustice of abortion."

"Abortion is not an abstract issue," explained Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life. "Having a memorial service where these babies are buried reminds us that abortion is not merely about beliefs, but about bloodshed; not just about viewpoints, but victims. By visiting the graves of the aborted unborn, we allow our hearts to be broken for them, and we recommit ourselves to protecting other children from suffering the same fate."

The first National Day of Remembrance was held last September on the 25th anniversary of the solemn burial of several hundred abortion victims in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Prayer services were held at over 100 locations, with thousands of mourners participating. Response was so great that the National Day of Remembrance has been established as an annual event, to be held on the second Saturday each September.

For more information about the National Day of Remembrance, including the stories behind the grave sites of aborted children and the locations of memorial services being held September 13, visit AbortionMemorials.com.

European Court: No Human Right to Kill a Baby With Down Syndrome in Abortion

In 2012, the European Court of Human Rights heard a case concerning a woman who filed a suit against a doctor for breaching his obligation to prescribe a screening test for Down syndrome. The woman, Anita KRŪZMANE, gave birth to a baby with Down syndrome and claimed that her right’s had been violated in respect to her right to have an abortion.

However, the court denied the suit in June.

The JérômeLejeuneFoundation said the following about the case in their press release:

The Jérôme Lejeune Foundation has applauded the fact that the court abstained from considering a child with Down syndrome a cause of harm to the mother. It did not expressly recognize the abortion of a child with Down syndrome as a right in the name of  the European Convention on Human Rights (article 8 concerning the respect to the right  to a privacy), but only and indirectly recognized a right to information of women concerning the health of their expected babies.

The Foundation has noted with satisfaction that the Court did not grant the applicant, on the ground of material harm (the lack of resource and the allowance for the child), the 253.000 euros demanded. Thus, it did not consider that there was any wrong done on the grounds of the birth.


This decision from the European court means that they denied KRŪZMANE’s request for compensation and she will not receive any money from the suit. It also means that it is not a human right to abort a baby with Down syndrome.

Unfortunately, her case isn’t the only one of a mother filing a lawsuit against medical professionals because her baby was born with Down syndrome. In 2012, an Oregon family won a $2.9 million dollar “wrongful birth” lawsuit after a hospital missed their daughters Down syndrome diagnosis. The parents said that they would have terminated the pregnancy if they had not been assured that their baby did not have the genetic condition.

Additionally, this year we saw yet another example of inhumane treatment toward children with Down syndrome. David and Wendy Farnell abandoned their son with Down syndrome in Thailand but kept his healthy twin sister and escaped to Australia. Ever since, the Child Protection officials of Thailand have been working tirelessly to locate his parents. However, it emerged last week that they have been hiding in their own home in Australia. Sadly, before Gammy was born, his parents wanted a surrogate to abort him because of his diagnosis. But the surrogate refused and gave birth to both children.

While these examples of abuse and eugenic ideologies toward children with Down syndrome are disheartening, pro-abortion advocates stick to it because they believe aborting a disabled baby is better than the alternative. In other words, they would rather have abortionist’s dismember children limb by limb, than let them live. They even argue that this would be the “humane choice”.

Ask yourself, if your father was limited by cancer and had to suffer through chemotherapy, or you had a child with autism who was ridiculed by peers, would you be ok with someone killing them simply because they would face hardship? Would you say the kindest thing society could do would be to end their life? Of course not. People with disabilities are worthy of the same dignity given to the rest of us.

The same goes for children with Down syndrome. They should not be defined by their capabilities or struggles, but by the fact that they are a part of the human family. When we begin to define a person’s value by what they can or cannot do, we are taking steps toward an ugly future, where society decides when a life is worth eliminating.

By Sarah Zagorski
Source: LifeNews.com

Ginsburg Wants to Make Abortion Right Equal to Second Amendment

I have come to believe that if Roe v. Wade is ever overturned–a big if–it will be from the other side. That is, I think it is more likely that a future Supreme Court will find Roe and its progeny to be too restrictive and overturn the case in the cause of forging an all-encompassing right to abortion, instead of returning abortion to state regulation. From a piece I wrote about that in First Things, “A Pro-Abortion Reversal of Roe v Wade?”:

[Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader] Ginsburg believes adamantly that women are denied “equal citizen stature” by boundaries placed around access to abortion. Not only that, but in an angry dissent to the 2007 Supreme Court ruling upholding the federal ban on partial birth abortion, she (joined by Justice Breyer among the current justices) railed against the majority allowing “moral concerns” to “override fundamental rights.”



That sounded to me as advocacy for an unfettered right to abortion at any time and for any reason. So, I asked expert anti-abortion attorney Clarke D. Forsyth, the senior counsel for Americans United for Life. whether Ginsburg’s view would abolish all abortion regulation. Yes, he told me: If the right to an abortion were based on “equal protection of the law,” as opposed to other constitutional standards, it would “permit no regulations at any time,” perhaps even, “requiring [government] abortion funding.”

Now, the New York Times’ legal reporter Linda Greenhouse–who makes little pretense about objectivity in her journalism–provides more fuel for my fire. Lamenting the successful restrictions on abortion in states such as Texas, she lauds a recent Federal Court of Appeals ruling that the right to abortion is equivalent to the right to keep and bear arms. From her piece:

Guns and abortion? That’s a pairing no previous judicial opinion has made. “At its core, each protected right is held by the individual,” the judge explained. “However, neither right can be fully exercised without the assistance of someone else. The right to abortion cannot be exercised without a medical professional, and the right to keep and bear arms means little if there is no one from whom to acquire the handgun or ammunition.”

Do I have to point out how delicious this analogy is? Of course, it’s unthinkable that Alabama would regulate firearms dealers to the point of extinction. But recall the June day 22 years ago when the Supreme Court, to the surprise of nearly everyone, reaffirmed the right to abortion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. It was unthinkable then that nearly a generation later, states would flagrantly be regulating the practice of abortion (in the name of women’s health and safety, no less) out of business — a goal that Texas, enabled by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is close to achieving.

Except that gun ownership is an express right, protected by the Second Amendment to the Constitution. In contrast, the right to an abortion was invented by Justices based on implied so-called “penumbras and emanations”–but never mind.

No right is absolute, or course. We aren’t allowed to own machine guns, for example.

But I think that advocates like Greenhouse–and certainly Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg–want abortion to be. Indeed, check out Greenhouse’s last paragraph:

Still, judges’ willingness to step outside the abortion frame and to weigh, from that broad perspective, whether the abortion right has become unduly burdened is something new and potentially of great value in the struggle to preserve women’s reproductive freedom. Even in the face of cynical and unrelenting political attack, the right to abortion can become stronger the more tightly it is stitched into the constitutional fabric, the more that smart and gutsy judges are willing to treat it as what it is, a right like any other.

As I said in my First Things piece, I believe the successes of the pro life movement has liberals ready to replace the cracked wall of Roe by transforming abortion into an absolute right through the ninth month. Comparing access to abortion to the right to own a gun is a step down that path.

LifeNews.com Note: Wesley J. Smith, J.D., is a special consultant to the Center for Bioethics and Culture and a bioethics attorney who blogs at Human Exeptionalism.

Source: LifeNews.com

Nations Silent as UN Presents Plan to Push Abortion in War-Torn Countries

A new UN directive to promote abortion in war-torn areas went unchallenged when it was presented to member states at UN headquarters last week.

The high level UN officials who presented a guidance note of the Secretary-General with the new directive in a packed meeting room at UN headquarters were visibly anxious. It is the first time the Secretary-General has openly instructed UN staff and officials to promote abortion. No one used the term “abortion” during the meeting, but it was clearly on everyone’s mind.

Officials and delegates looked around furtively, scouting the room as if to anticipate where the challenge might come from. In the end, the challenge never came.



The guidance note on reparations for conflict-related sexual violence goes beyond what UN staff has ever dared to say about abortion, at least publically. The controversial document instructs UN officials and staff to lobby for changes in law to permit abortion as a form of reparation for sexual violence against women. In the wake of the Secretary-General’s note, UN officials advocating abortion won’t seem “rogue” officials any longer, but rather good foot soldiers for the Secretary-General.

The meeting on Friday was a non-official launch of sorts. Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, head of the UN’s agency for women, UN Women, highlighted the section that contains the offending new directive to promote abortion in her brief speech, as if daring anyone to challenge her.

She called this effort part of a “broader struggle” for gender equality, but acknowledged the directive has no legal or normative value. “To leave it at this level is not enough” she said, highlighting the need to change laws.

Ivan Šimonović, second in command in the UN human rights bureaucracy, said the contents of the guidance note are worthless unless implemented. He suggested criticizing states through treaty bodies, special rapporteurs, and the UN process called Universal Periodic Review, to pressure states to liberalize their laws.

The UN bureaucracy faces an uphill battle, however, especially in delicate post-war situations. On Friday, the only country held up as an example of how to address sexual violence in war torn areas was Colombia, where legislators rejected a right to abortion for cases of rape in March.

None of the countries that would normally object to this kind of maneuver in the UN bureaucracy objected to the directive during the presentation on Friday. This may be because the document is not considered worth the aggravation of a public scuffle with the UN bureaucracy. The causes and consequences of wars are something national leaders would rather put behind them, especially at a time when they need the UN bureaucracy to help fund programs that are much higher on their nation’s list of priorities.

This does not mean the Secretary-General is not hearing complaints, only that they are not made in public. Sources have told the Friday Fax that several member states, mostly from Africa, the Middle East, and Asia are preparing a cautionary note for the Secretary-General on this and other matters where they believe he is interfering with exclusively national prerogatives.

The Secretary-General, who heads up the UN bureaucracy, frequently tests the outer limits of his mandate. Even so, the note goes far beyond his competence or that of the UN bureaucracy. Abortion is a subject to be dealt with under national legislation in UN consensus, and it is the kind of subject that the framers of the UN Charter never contemplated coming under the purview of any UN entity.

African countries— many of which are in conflict or only recently emerged from it—mostly prohibit abortion and are the primary targets of this new bureaucratic campaign. In these vulnerable states, the UN has a hefty responsibility to protect all people from further harm. The Secretary-General’s use of post-conflict situations to promote abortion is a scandalous moral failure and betrayal of trust. He got away with it on Friday, But it won’t be for long.

LifeNews.com Note: Stefano Gennarini, J.D. writes for the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute. This article originally appeared in the pro-life group’s Friday Fax publication and is used with permission.

Source: LifeNews.com

Offer preteen girls sex ed and abortion while they are still ‘malleable’: Georgetown researchers

A new report from Georgetown University suggests that public school children should be exposed to sexually explicit sex education at age 10 – while their views are still “malleable” – and that schools could lower STD and abortion rates by providing all girls capable of reproduction with “contraceptives and safe abortion” without “parental approval.”

The report promotes the sex ed and abortion-on-demand regimen for “Very Young Adolescents (VYAs),” defined as children between the ages of 10 and 14.

“Investing in very young adolescents’ sexual and reproductive health” was written by Susan M. Igras, Marjorie Macieira, Elaine Murphy, and Rebecka Lundgren of the Institute for Reproductive Health at Georgetown University and published in Global Public Health.

According to the researchers, it is unfortunate when children view their parents as the authority on sex.

“Younger adolescents see parents as a primary source of information and support, but most parents are ill-equipped to address issues related to puberty, SRH [sexual and reproductive health], and gender roles, and lack communication skills attuned to the young adolescents in their lives,” the researchers write. “Parental desire to protect their children is often exercised through behavioral regulation and monitoring."

“Parents worry that their daughters’ emerging fertility and sexuality could lead to premarital pregnancy and keep their daughters close to home to ensure safety," the report adds.

The researchers are also concerned that parents teach their children “gender-related ‘rules'” about behaviors appropriate to each sex, such as when “parents begin preparing their daughters for roles as future wives and mothers.”

In general, “parental and community norms serve to reinforce individuals’ behaviors and relationships that lead to poor adult SRH,” the authors conclude.

They also say parental authority violates “VYA rights,” such as denying children in the 10-14 age-range birth control and abortion.

“For those older VYAs who become sexually active, access to contraceptives and safe abortion remains largely unavailable due to regulations requiring parental approval or informal health care policies,” they state.

Their proposed public education courses are intended to combat that.

“If programs…are implemented at a time when adolescents are still malleable and relatively free of sexual and reproductive health problems and gender role biases, very young adolescents can be guided safely through this life stage,” the report concludes.

Parental groups said the proposals would harm children and insert the state in the unique relationship of a parent and child.

“Concerned Women for America supports reform of public education by returning authority to parents,” Alison Howard, communications director for Concerned Women for America, told LifeSiteNews.com. “We should be working toward restoring the quality of education to a level of excellence in academics without governmental mandates that are detrimental to parental rights.”
She warned that the report's suggestions of furnishing preteens with birth control and possibly abortion, with or without parental consent, will have “serious emotional and physical consequences” for young people.

“There is no denying the fact that we are in the middle of an STD epidemic, with more than 20 million new STD cases every year - the majority of them affecting 15- to 25-year-olds. Yet supposedly responsible adults still encourage early sexual activity for young boys and girls,” she said.

Her view contrasts with that of leftist publications such as Think Progress, which complains that “just 18 states and the District of Columbia require sexual health courses to cover information about birth control. Instead of providing teens with medically accurate information about their bodies, many public school districts still rely on 'abstinence-only' courses.”

Sex education is sometimes provided by Planned Parenthood, although a series of exposes have uncovered the organization giving young teens potentially dangerous advice.

“Parents are fighting an uphill battle to protect their children from well-funded opponents like Planned Parenthood, who work within schools to infiltrate curricula with an agenda of increased sexual activity for America’s young people. Our schools and our children are not to be used as social experiments,” Howard told LifeSiteNews. “Concerned Women for America and an alliance of groups including Live Action, Alliance Defending Freedom, and the National Abstinence Education Association are working to draw attention to the emphasis and motives these groups have in targeting the most innocent among us with their message of sexual promiscuity and deterioration of parental involvement.”

LifeSiteNews.com

You'll be Amazed at How This Couple Announces Their New Baby in this Coke Ad

As many of you may know, Coke’s summer marketing campaign, launched in June, has people searching the soda displays at stores for their own personalized Coke bottles. According to a press release from the company, Coke bottles around the world have the 250 most popular names among teens and millennials.

 

 

One couple used these Coke bottles to make a very cute and clever video to announce their pregnancy.

 

Known only as the McGillicuddys, this young couple is seen drinking Diet Cokes and quickly realizing that their voices change according to the names on the cans.

 

They first swap each other’s voices. Then they go on to hilariously take on famous voices, varying from Morgan Freeman to Arnold Schwarzenegger.

 

Their voices finally come back to normal, and when they look at the cans to see why, their pregnancy is announced.

 

Such a creative and sweet way of announcing such an important event in their lives. Best of luck to the McGillicuddys and their baby on the way!

 

Click here to view the video

 

LifeNews.com, Steven Ertelt

LifeNews Note: This post originally appeared at Live Action News.

 

Planned Parenthood Does Abortions and Wastes $115 Million of Your Tax Dollars

You work hard for your money, and as a good, upstanding citizen, you pay your taxes, trusting that those dollars will be used to benefit the greater community. They should not be wasted. They should not be abused. And it’s reasonable to believe that any organization that benefits from those dollars should not be caught up in potential fraud.

But, if actions speak louder than words, that’s clearly not how Planned Parenthood sees it.

We recently released our Annual Report on Planned Parenthood Affiliates and State Family Planning Programs. So, what did we find?

A large number of federal and state audits have documented that improper practices from Planned Parenthood and state family planning agencies have resulted in a minimum of $115 million in losses to American taxpayers.

A minimum of $115 million…lost.

What else could those tax dollars have gone to? They could have been used to help the homeless, improve education, or support foster or adoptive families. Perhaps they could have been used to help the economy or support our veterans. Instead, they went to support waste, abuse, and potential fraud by Planned Parenthood and other state family planning programs.

Is that where you want part of your paycheck to go?

Much of Planned Parenthood’s potential fraud was found in their unlawful billing practices, including: duplicate billing for examinations and products, billing for services that weren’t medically necessary, billing for services that weren’t really provided, and more.

You read that right. In some circumstances, Planned Parenthood was paid for services they didn’t even provide! Could you imagine paying your doctor for an annual physical without him actually giving you an annual physical?

Ridiculous.

The potential fraud goes even deeper. As the report indicates:

·     “At Planned Parenthood of Southwest Michigan (PPSWMI), a May 2010 audit revealed bank statements accumulated for up to six months before being reconciled, and personal expenses such as household bills being paid as company expenses.”

·     “In Vermont, Planned Parenthood of Northern New England Action Fund agreed to pay a $30,000 fine to the Vermont Office of the Attorney General for failing to comply with political committee reporting requirements relating to $119,437 it spent in the 2010 gubernatorial election.”

·     “Planned Parenthood affiliates have also been fined or settled in cases involving wrongful death / medical malpractice, failure to report child sexual abuse and rape, and regulatory violations.”

These are just some of the stories. But, don’t just take it from me. You can read about it all in our annual report on Planned Parenthood.

Take Action

It’s time to hold Planned Parenthood accountable. We must investigate their plan.

Spread the word to your friends, family, and followers on social media. And be sure to contact your local congressman or senator to investigate Planned Parenthood for waste, abuse, and potential fraud.

Question: What other ways can $115 million be used to benefit society? Share in our comments section below.

LifeNews Note: Eric Porteous is Director of Digital Marketing for Alliance Defending Freedom

LifeNews.com by Eric Porteous

 

Amazing New "Pea Pod" Invention Helps Premature Babies Survive

Barbara Kozol, a Medford pediatric therapist, has invented a “pea pod” for preemie babies to assist them during the first month after their arrival. Most premature infants struggle through a unique set of challenges before leaving the hospital and require constant monitoring. One of obstacles they may face is the inability to experience healthy and complete bone growth. Sarah Lemon, a freelance writer, said the following in The Mail Tribune about bone growth and preemie babies:

“An increased risk of fracture accompanies preemies‘ poor bone growth and density, leading to diminished height as adults. Consequently, the past decade has seen providers focus on physical-activity programs for infants in neonatal intensive care to stimulate the skeletal system.”

However, inventions like Kozol’s peapod give preemies a greater chance of developing normally and in a comforting environment. The therapeutic pod is designed to imitate the secure, stretchy, and warm womb of a pregnant mother.

At the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit and Special Care Nursery at Rogue Regional Medical Center in Oregon, Kozol is conducting a federally approved study of the pods’ affect on premature infants. The most recent recipient of the benefits of her invention is a little boy named Colton Shaw. Lemon describes Colton’s experience in the peapod this way: “Unless he is being handled by family or care providers, Colton resides 24 hours per day in the pea pod, where he pushes against the elastic material much as he did for 30 weeks in utero.”

She continues, “Pulling the pod’s hood up over Colton’s ears elicits a squall from the 3-pound, 5-ounce boy. But for the most part, the pod is a soothing mechanism as much as a therapeutic tool.”

The pod is an alternative to stimulation and joint compression that many pediatric therapists use to facilitate healthy bone growth. Although these therapies have positive outcomes, preemies are often irritated by the manipulation and unnecessary stress is put on the infant.

Additionally, Lemon said that the pod allowed Colton to stretch his limbs and strain against the confinement at his own pace and comfort level. “A month of this therapy is the goal of Kozol’s study, but some subjects do so well that the hospital discharges them from care before they can finish,” Lemon concluded.

This past year, 10 preemies have completed Kozol’s study, and many more are expected to be beneficiaries of the new pea pod.

LifeNews.com by Sarah Zagorski

The devastating reality of Post Abortion Stress Syndrome

 

She sat across from me, tears streaming down her face. The subject of abortion came up and this woman struggled to discuss it. ‘Emotionally damaging’ was the phrase she used to describe the procedure.

 

She thought about her child. She wondered how old he or she may be. As she reflected on her past she wrestled with feelings of regret. She admitted to choosing abortion without knowing all of the facts. She felt rushed into the decision, wishing now that she would have gathered more information before she decided.

 

This woman’s story is all too common. In the decade I’ve been involved in the pro-life movement I’ve heard similar tales. I met a woman who was so affected by her abortion that she couldn’t talk about it for 20 years.

 

Another lady shared a chilling story of using the RU-486 pill and the absolute horror she faced witnessing her unborn baby pass. I remember the African-American woman who pulled me aside and whispered her confession. The pain of her choice etched upon her face.

 

Susanne Babbel is a licensed Marriage and Family Therapist who has a P.H.D in Psychology. She is also a psychotherapist with an emphasis on trauma and depression. In an article for ‘Psychology Today’ titled, ‘Post Abortion Stress Syndrome (PASS) – Does It Exist?’ she writes: ‘No matter your philosophical, religious, or political views on abortion, the fact of the matter is, the actual experience can affect women not only on a personal level but can potentially have psychological repercussions.’

 

Babbel refers to this as Post Abortion Stress Syndrome. (PASS) is based on Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PSTD). It’s the name given to the psychological aftereffects of abortion. Babbel notes that the disorder is real, although the term has not been recognized by the American Psychological Association.

Sadly those who support abortion often refuse to acknowledge that long term negative effects that it can bring to many women. The National Abortion Federation calls (PASS) a ‘myth‘ and the popular liberal Ms. Magazine says it’s a ‘bogus affliction invented by the religious right’.

 

However Babbel asserts “any event that causes trauma can indeed result in PTSD, and abortion is no exception.” Babbel is not declaring this because she’s a pro-life therapist. She further states, ‘Believing that PASS exists does not mean that one does not believe in a woman’s right to choose; it simply means that one believes in supportive and constructive counseling around the trauma symptoms’. Babbel lists ‘guilt, anxiety, numbness, depression, flashbacks, and suicidal thoughts as symptoms of PASS.

 

Babbel makes no claim that these symptoms will follow after every abortion. She writes: While abortion can induce post-traumatic stress in some, others will suffer no repercussions at all. I can understand that statement.

 

I personally believe there is an undeniable, emotional, physical, and even spiritual connection between a mother and a child. However, I’ve met a number of post-abortive women who have a range of experiences. I don’t oppose abortion solely because I believe it will cause trauma to a woman’s soul. I oppose abortion because it’s morally wrong to destroy the life of a fetus. Some women will make that destructive decision with little sorrow, regret, or negative emotional consequences.

 

We live in a society that views abortion as a private decision which women need not regret. Therefore women with seemingly ‘positive’ abortion experiences are often encouraged to share them with pride. However women with negative experiences find themselves in a difficult place. They suffer from the pain of their abortion, all the while living in a society that tells them that pain isn’t real or necessary.

 

Thankfully organizations are here for that very reason. They are safe places for women who need healing after their abortion. If you or anyone you know has suffered emotional or physical pain from an abortion, there is help available to you. You are not alone. You don’t have to carry the secret or live in shame. Check out resources like Afterabortion.org and take a step towards freedom.

 

Editor’s note. This appeared at liveactionnews.org.

By Christina Martin

 

Illinois Congresswoman attempts to play down her pro-abortion record

This week the national pro-life Susan B. Anthony List Candidate Fund blasted Illinois Congresswoman Cheri Bustos (photo above) for concealing her support for abortion on-demand up until the moment of birth.

Last summer, Bustos voted against the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, a bill to stop late abortion after 5 months, more than halfway through pregnancy. The Wall Street Journal has reported that, nationwide, candidates endorsed by the pro-abortion EMILY's List are avoiding the issue of abortion this election cycle. Yesterday, the New York Times also reported that the abortion lobby is purposefully changing its messaging to avoid the subject of abortion and "shunning" the term "pro-choice."

When asked by the Sauk Valley News, Rep. Bustos previously refused to explain her position on taxpayer funding for abortion, parental notification laws, and third-trimester abortions.

"According to the Lozier Institute, the U.S. is one of only seven countries to allow brutal abortion after 5 months – a distinction we share with China and North Korea. Cheri Bustos wants it to stay that way," said SBA List Candidate Fund President Marjorie Dannenfelser. "Last year, Congresswoman Bustos was part of the extreme minority to vote against a modest, compassionate measure to protect babies after 5 months – when science shows the child feels excruciating pain. Bustos' views have earned her the endorsement of EMILY's List and the support of America's largest abortion business, Planned Parenthood, but what about Illinois voters? Her silence on this issue is evidence that she is aware her fringe position drives away her constituents."

The SBA List Candidate Fund previously endorsed Bustos' opponent, Bobby Schilling, in March 2014.

Source: Illinois Review

US senator introduces bill to see taxpayers cover cost of abortifacients for military women

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-NH, has introduced legislation that would require all FDA-approved birth control and abortion pills and devices be made available at no cost to women in the military. Sens. Patty Murray, D-WA, and Harry Reid, D-NV, also acted as sponsors.

"Female service members deserve access to the same basic health care as the women they protect and it's unacceptable that they don't," Shaheen, whose amendment to expand abortion coverage for military women became law in 2013, said in a statement this week.

The 2014 bill, called the "Access to Contraception for Women Service members and Dependents Act of 2014," requires no co-pay for military women for all 20 FDA-approved birth control and abortifacient drugs and devices.

"Giving women in the military access to basic preventative health care, including contraception and family planning counseling, will strengthen our military as a whole," she says. "And it will make sure that women who get their health insurance from the military never have to worry about how they're going to pay for their contraception."

Currently, female service members are required to provide a co-pay if they order contraceptives and abortifacients at retail pharmacies and by mail.

Abortion groups and several retired military officials have supported the bill. The heads of NARAL Pro-Choice America and Planned Parenthood, among others, praised the expanded contraception access, with NARAL President Ilyse Hogue declaring,"Senators Shaheen, Reid and Murray have come to the defense of our military servicewomen and families with legislation that will ensure access to the comprehensive health care they deserve, including birth control and accurate family-planning counseling."

In their statements of support for the Act, Shaheen, Hogue, Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards, and others failed to differentiate between the 16 contraceptives approved by the FDA and the four abortifacients and potential abortifacients also approved by the FDA. Coverage of these four drugs and devices were what the owners of Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood opposed in their recent lawsuit to the Supreme Court.

Likewise, a coalition of supporters for the Act -- including Catholics for Choice, the ACLU, and a number of Jewish and Protestant organizations -- failed to mention abortifacients and potential abortifacients in their support. Contrary to this portrayal of abortifacients as contraceptives, Just Facts President James Agresti recently pointed to both scientific and government sources that show intrauterine devices end the life of an unborn child, and morning-after pills "may block implantation."
Agresti noted that implantation takes place more than a week after fertilization, and thus anything that blocks implantation is destroying an unborn child.

Shaheen's office did not respond to LifeSiteNews' request for clarification as to whether the senator finds this concerning.

LifeSiteNews also asked Shaheen, who has been an outspoken proponent of changing how the military handles sexual assault, if she had concerns about the potential for rapists to cover up their crimes with abortifacients. Pro-life groups such as Life Dynamics, Inc. and Students for Life of America have shown such cover-ups occur with underage girls who are raped by adult men.

The bill had more than 15 Democratic co-sponsors as of publication time. The Democratic-controlled Senate may be able to get the bill past a Republican filibuster, but the GOP-controlled House is considered more pro-life than the Senate. However, some are concerned in light of the fact that in 2013 the House approved the defense authorization bill that included Shaheen's abortion amendment.
Congress goes on recess at the end of this week until September, which means the bill would only have a few weeks to pass before elections in November, and a few weeks after the elections in a lame-duck session.

Source: LifeSiteNews.com

Did a Federal Court Just Rule That Every Single State Has to Have an Abortion Clinic?

Earlier this week, in a transparent act of judicial slight-of-hand, two judges on the 5^th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled a pro-life bill in Mississippi unconstitutional.

They enjoined the law not because of what it says — it merely brings abortion regulations back in line with state standards for ambulatory surgical centers — but because holding abortionists to standard medical standards would shut down the last abortion facility in the state. In other words, two unelected justices decided that keeping abortionists in business is more important than the safety of women. Even more amazing is that the same Circuit ruled in favor of a very similar law in Texas.

At issue in Mississippi is a 2012 law removing a special exemption for abortionists from the state's requirement that all doctors at ambulatory surgical centers — medical clinics, dental offices, etc. — maintain admitting privileges at a local hospital. Thirteen other states already require abortionists to have either admittance privileges or some other agreement with a local hospital.

This common-sense requirement ensures that out-of-state abortionists cannot come into the state, perform a rapid series of abortions, and move on to another state . A traveling abortionist leaves women at greater risk for life-threatening medical complications requiring them to seek emergency care. Sometimes these women have had little or no help in the hand-off to hospital physicians.

Mississippi's last remaining abortion clinic sued to have the law enjoined because no local hospital would give admittance privileges to two of their abortionists. Private hospitals can deny physicians admittance privileges for a variety of reasons — type and volume of practice, medical malpractice history, etc. — but five of the seven hospitals cited abortion as one of the reasons. On Tuesday, two justices on the 5^th Circuit put the abortion agenda ahead of women's safety and ruled that the law cannot be enforced because it would shut down Mississippi's last abortion facility.

This is a dangerous and novel attempt to rewrite judicial precedence to require at least one abortion facility in a state. What if that abortionist is like the "house of horrors" revealed two years ago at abortionist Gosnell's Philadelphia clinic? We sure hope other states continue to pass these regulations and that any similar laws will be upheld for what they are, common sense regulations aimed to help women.

Source: LifeNews.com
LifeNews Note: Tony Perkins is the president of the Family Research Council.